I doubt very much that bellavoz's translation is wrong, and if you think it is, then it would be better to write (or even rate) whatever you think is not right than saying that her translation is wrong without giving any reason.

I'm sorry but you're wrong. You obviously don't speak spanish because then you would know that they aren't the same. The name of the song is "Libre Soy" which means "I Am Free", not "Let it Go". Again: IT'S NOT THE SAME.

This translation was made from a song from a movie (which has countless foreign versions in foreign languages). In English, the song is sung by Demi (perhaps I'm wrong because I haven't watched the movie), but in Spanish it was sung by Tini. So, bellavoz's translation is NOT wrong, but you are.

@Hola-hello, please read the above comments. This translation is of the Spanish language version of the song "Let it go".

In the original English movie it was performed by Idina Menzel and later on by Demi Lovato. In the Spanish version of the movie, it was performed by Martina Stoessel. However, if you still think that this translation is wrong, I think that it would be better for you to leave a concise comment stating your reasons and not simply "then your translation sorry but I think I'm telling the truth im sorry" (as you've said).

And if you don't, then follow what cm.1 said. It's not good for you to say something is wrong but not explain what.

Should be:
"The wind is roaring and there's a storm in my interior
A tempest that came out of me."

And this passage:
"No has de abrir tu corazón
Pues ya se abrió"

Should be:
"You shall/must/will not open your heart. (It's supposed to be a command, not just an option/suggestion as "You don't have to" would imply.)
Well, it's been opened. (A bit tricky to translate 100% accurately because "ya" doesn't exist in English. However, "Because" would only work if she had said "Porque.")

Are you the native speaker? Please don't give misleading information
en mi interior > In english it'd me more natural to say "inside of me"
no has de > most of the times depending on the context it means "you shouldn't" but here this doesn't make sense so the context implies "you don't have to" is correct. "You shall/will not" are not imperatives in english "you are not to" "thou shalt not" are imperatives
pues ya se abrió > pues (since/because) ya (already) se abrió (it opened/it has opened) > because it has already opened
Furthermore translations don't have to be a word for word rendition of the original, it's up to the translator to express the meaning the way they want and I think this translation is correct

The question is, are you? I've been speaking both English and Spanish my entire life. I can't really talk to you using linguistic jargon because of that, but I do notice that tenses will sometimes translate into a different one in the other language. I'm studying a third language as I'm immigrating somewhere else, and I've noticed it with this one too. They are all different languages after all.

Firstly, whatever "sounds more natural" vs literal meaning is personal preference but I prefer to go with literals (with slight grammatical compensation if needed) to give the viewer a chance to understand the nuances and mechanics of the language better. After all, that's a big reason people have for showing interest in the interpretations of other languages in the first place.

-En mi interior translates directly and pretty obviously into what I've said. Natural English phrasing is very easily inferred.

-The phrase "No has de" doesn't give you the option to say no, period. The context fits perfectly given that she's quoting all the rules she imposed on herself or were imposed to her by others in order to hide her secret. Regardless of whether it matches the imperative or not, the fact is that when you use the English phrase "You don't have to," you're saying something very different to "You are not to." You're saying that whatever action at hand, in this case opening her heart, is not actually required or may be excessive. "Oh, you don't have to eat the apple (if someone doesn't like apples)," and "You don't have to eat all the apples (in case you wanted an apple too)." Neither of these situations apply to what Elsa is saying. As I mentioned, she's quoting a rule.

-"Pues ya se abrio," is supposed to go along with the phrase before it. Having her say "You don't have to open your heart," followed by "Because it's already been opened," not only sounds awkward in this context, but it changes to meaning to say that it was because of those rules that her heart was opened. That makes zero sense. "You are not to open your heart" followed by "Well, it's been opened," says that the rules were to no avail because it happened anyway which is precisely what is going on here.

Did I claim to be one? I'm not but I know my way around. Does being a native speaker make you an unequivocal expert? I'd say no judging from your own suggestion about "you shall/will not open your heart". Is translation an exact process? No because you and I argue over a simple translation. As for what's more natural in english you can try Google.
If you think you can do better then you're welcome to enter your version, if you think you can help a user improve their translation then you're more than welcome to post a comprehensive comment, issuing decrees about what's right and what's not and signing "Source: Native English/Spanish speaker" isn't welcome period

You didn't claim to be one, sure, but that doesn't mean I can't ask you the same question. Being a native speaker doesn't grant me a PhD in English from Oxford or in Spanish from UNAM, but it does mean that I am more familiar with the dynamics of the languages from cultural and practical points of views.

"you're more than welcome to post a comprehensive comment",
Yes, I agree with you there. It's what I did.

"issuing decrees about what's right and what's not and signing "Source: Native English/Spanish speaker" isn't welcome period"
Oh? You're sort of giving me mixed messages now. Do you not know the meaning of the word "comprehensive?" I'm not quite sure how I'm "giving decrees."

Your decree: "There are a few things wrong here"
I'm not getting overprotective if that's what you're trying to say, I'm just explaining to you that you should be less absolute in your comments, after all it's your opinion
Shape up or ship out

There's a difference between an opinion and stating facts as you know them given the amount of years of exposure, both academically and at home, to the subjects at hand. The things I've pointed out aren't wrong because I feel like it, the languages just are what they are. And I think I've been pretty clear in substantiating what I've pointed out, I'm not just talking out of my ass.